Korean Crypto Firms Organize Consortium for Real-World Asset Tokens

Suspected Malicious Activity Drains AnySwap Tokens via Multichain ExecutorAccording to an on-chain sleuth known as Spreek, a person is using the Multichain Executor to drain tokens associated with the AnySwap bridging protocol.Multichain is a cross-chain routing network, established and maintained by a Chinese developer team. It supports in excess of 25 blockchains and more than 1,100 tokens.Photo by Marek Piwnicki on Unsplash$100 million outflowThis revelation comes after abnormal outflows of over $100 million from Multichain bridges on July 7, which were flagged by the Multichain team. Spreek’s report via Twitter on July 10 states that the Multichain Executor address has been draining anyToken addresses across multiple chains and transferring them to a new externally owned account (EOA).Evidence provided in the report includes an Ethereum transaction, 0x53ede4462d90978b992b0a88727de19afe4e96f0374aa1a221b8ff65fda5a6fe, which called the “anySwapFeeTo” method on the Multichain Router: V4 contract. This transaction resulted in approximately $15,275.90 worth of anyDAI being minted on Ethereum, sent to the Multichain Executor, burned, and exchanged for the underlying DAI backing the asset.The funds from these transactions were sent to the following address:0x1eed63efba5f81d95bfe37d82c8e736b974f477b. Similarly, on the BNB Smart Chain (BSC), the Multichain Executor used the anySwapFeeTo function to convert $208,997 worth of anyUSDC into Binance-pegged USDC and sent them to the same address. Additionally, 50.80 anyBTC, equivalent to $39,251.43 at the time, was converted into Binance-pegged Bitcoin and sent to the address.In total, approximately $263,524.33 worth of tokens were sent to this address through the anySwapFeeTo method. Spreek suggests that this behavior could be part of the protocol’s normal functioning. However, a different account engaged in similar activity the day before and ultimately sold the drained tokens, indicating malicious intent.Potential exploitSpreek theorizes that the attacker may be exploiting the anySwapFeeTo function by setting fees to an arbitrarily large amount, allowing them to drain users’ funds. The function apparently permits setting any value, enabling the address to choose the total value of the token held in that anyToken.The Multichain incident has puzzled blockchain analysts, as it remains unclear whether it resulted from an exploit or if it was simply large token-holders moving their funds between networks. The mystery began on July 7 when over $100 million worth of tokens were withdrawn from the Ethereum side of Multichain’s bridges and transferred to wallet addresses with no prior transactions. This represented the majority of funds held on each bridge.Hack or rug pullThe Multichain team labeled these withdrawals as “abnormal” and advised users to stop using the protocol. However, they have not disclosed the source or nature of the anomaly. In response to the incident, stablecoin issuers Circle and Tether froze some of the addresses involved in the suspicious transactions. Chainanalysis, a blockchain analytics firm, has commented that the incident appears more like a hack or rug pull rather than a migration.Adding to the complexity, the Multichain team has reported that their CEO is missing, and they have shut down certain bridges due to losing access to some of the network’s multi-party computation network servers. There have been various concerns relative to Multichain since May. The situation continues to evolve, with ongoing investigations and efforts to mitigate any potential damage caused by the suspected malicious activity.

Kiln, the Paris-based Ethereum staking platform, has successfully secured $17 million in a recent funding round, as revealed in a press release on Thursday. Round led by 1kxThe financing round was spearheaded by 1kx, with participation from Crypto.com, Wintermute Ventures, Thailand’s KXVC and Hong Kong’s LBank and IOSG. This infusion of capital brings Kiln's total funding to $35 million, marking a milestone in the company's growth trajectory. The latest funding follows a previous investment of $17.6 million in 2022 from Illuminate Financial, LeadBlock Partners, Sparkle Ventures, Alven and Blue Yard Capital, among others. Kiln opted not to disclose the valuation associated with the recent funding round. In 2021, Canadian blockchain infrastructure and staking firm Figment reached unicorn status with a $1.4 billion valuation. The Kiln platform has witnessed significant growth, increasing its staked assets under management to $4.2 billion in 2023. Acknowledging that growth on Jan. 4, Fred Lardieg, partner at Abu Dhabi sovereign fund Mubadala wrote:”This little-known French startup called @Kiln_finance has been killing it in the #Ethereum #Staking space, by relentlessly releasing new features throughout 2023. They're now the #1 operator of Ethereum validator nodes according to @ratedw3b.” The firm’s expansion is attributed to strategic integrations with various custody solutions, wallets and exchanges over the past year.Photo by DrawKit Illustrations on UnsplashRegional headquarters in SingaporeThe funds raised will be instrumental in facilitating Kiln's global expansion initiatives, including the establishment of its Asia-Pacific (APAC) headquarters in Singapore during the first quarter of the year. Additionally, the company aims to allocate resources for further product development to enhance its offerings in the decentralized finance (DeFi) space. Laszlo Szabo, CEO and co-founder of Kiln, articulated the company's mission, stating: "Our mission is to democratize value creation in the digital assets ecosystem, providing millions of users with easy access to rewards through our platform." The funds will support Kiln's commitment to making value creation in the digital assets space more accessible globally. The company plans to use the funding not only for expansion but also to introduce additional reward mechanisms in the rapidly evolving DeFi landscape. Regulatory uncertaintyWhile Ethereum staking offers users the opportunity to earn yields by validating transactions on the blockchain, the regulatory landscape remains uncertain. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has taken legal action against several exchanges involved in crypto staking, with SEC Chairman Gary Gensler expressing views on Ethereum-like tokens as potential securities. Despite regulatory challenges, Kiln's staking platform caters to institutional clients, allowing them to stake assets and offer white-label solutions to their customers. With a focus on proof-of-stake blockchains, Kiln holds a significant portion of staked assets on Ethereum, exceeding $3.1 billion, according to its Dune Analytics dashboard. 1kx Founding Partner Christopher Heymann emphasized the increasing role of financial institutions in the crypto space, stating:  "Financial institutions will become a dominant force in crypto, leveraging the immense market opportunity as they stake on behalf of their customers." By utilizing smart contracts, Kiln allows users to stake smaller amounts, overcoming the traditional barrier of a 32 ETH minimum requirement for native ether staking. This approach aligns with Kiln's goal of fostering inclusivity in the rapidly expanding world of decentralized finance.  

The Legal Future of South Korea’s Crypto Industry: Necessary Legislation and SystemsA recent National Assembly symposium organized by South Korea’s Digital Asset Policy Forum brought experts together to discuss the challenges and prospects of the implementation of the Virtual Asset User Protection Act at the National Assembly Members’ Office Building in Seoul on Tuesday.Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on UnsplashInternational modelsReferences were made to global examples, such as the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) — the world’s first standalone virtual asset legislation enacted in the EU — which ensures transparency, disclosure, authorization, and supervision of crypto-asset transactions. However, unlike the capital market, MiCA does not impose regular disclosure reporting requirements or corrections on them. Firms in Japan, on the other hand, are asked to provide disclosure under autonomous regulation through the Japan Virtual and Crypto Assets Exchange Association (JVCEA).Notably, in its recent Policy Recommendations for Crypto and Digital Asset Markets Consultation Report, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) states that it is “seeking to encourage optimal consistency in the way crypto-asset markets and securities markets are regulated within individual IOSCO jurisdictions, in accordance with the principle of ‘same activities, same risks, same regulatory outcomes’.” This principle refers to the concept that any crypto-asset activity that has a similar function and poses similar risks to those in the traditional financial system — such as operating a trading platform or providing custody services — is subject to regulation that ensures equivalent outcomes, as defined by the UK Parliament.The IOSCO report also suggests that crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) should disclose information regarding ownership and control of crypto-assets, issuer and business-related information, issuer management teams, transaction history and operational description of crypto-assets, token ownership concentration, transfer protocols, and a given CASP’s treatment of the client crypto-assets and their respective rights and entitlements during events like hard forks and airdrops.Hurdles to overcomeExperts at the forum reflected these considerations in their sentiments. Han Suh-hee, a lawyer at Barun Law Firm, emphasized that it is important to determine what kind of information should be disclosed. She argued that it is necessary to discuss to what extent information about virtual asset issuers should be disclosed and whether mandating firms to disclose their financial and business conditions is efficient.In particular, Han underlined the need to consider the differences between virtual assets and stocks when establishing a framework for the disclosure of virtual assets holdings. Unlike stocks, virtual assets possess distinctive characteristics like their borderless and decentralized nature, unclear issuer backgrounds, and the ability to conduct peer-to-peer (P2P) transactions.Lee Han-jin, a lawyer at Kim & Chang Law Firm, added that the enactment of Korea’s Virtual Asset User Protection Act was aimed at establishing a system directly targeted at regulating virtual assets and virtual asset service operators (VASPs) — a significant development from the Financial Transaction Reporting Act, which had until now been the only legal framework responsible for regulating VASPs along with other entities like casino business operators. Virtual assets are now subject to a more systematized regulatory approach.However, he said that the Virtual Asset User Protection Act still has its setbacks because it is undergoing a two-stage legislative process. Lee criticized the fact that the same definition of VASPs outlined in the Financial Transaction Reporting Act had been brought over, which limits their identity to transaction intermediaries, wallet operators, and custodians while overlooking their other roles like crypto management, crypto deposits, and crypto collective investments.Lee also pointed out another weakness: the scope of prohibition on using undisclosed information and market manipulation is broader in the Virtual Asset User Protection Act than in the Capital Markets Act. He argued that enforcement decrees should stipulate the definition of insiders and exceptional cases when deliberating on the prohibition of insider virtual asset trading.Lee thus emphasized the need for a clear definition of virtual assets in the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, as it is yet unclear whether they are objects or assets. All things considered, he believes there must be a law that can encompass blockchain-based decentralization, outline the similarities and differences between digital assets and financial products, and accommodate new services that utilize smart contracts.“We are in the process of creating a regulatory system similar to those being adopted in other countries based on their respective markets,” said Lee Seok-ran, head of the Financial Innovation Bureau at the Financial Services Commission (FSC). “Unlike the stock market, which is equipped with regulations to prevent fraudulent transactions and misconduct, virtual assets are traded on multiple exchanges, so we are considering how to interpret unfair trading activities and conduct market surveillance.”She explained that the commission is prioritizing user protection measures and subordinate regulations. “I believe we will be able to create a system for subordinate regulations on disclosure once an overall global trajectory is established. But before that happens, we are working on guidelines for defining unfair trading activities with regulators and the Digital Asset eXchange Alliance (DAXA).” Unfair trading activities associated with virtual assets include not only those conducted on exchanges but also under other circumstances.The FSC officer said that the financial authority is set to establish legal criteria to distinguish cases such as false statements in white papers of crypto projects. She added that enforcement decrees will define both the conditions for restricting deposits and withdrawals on crypto exchanges and the corresponding limits.